This book investigates Hegel’s interpretation of the mystical philosophy of Jakob Böhme, considered in the context of the reception of Böhme in the 18th and 19th centuries, and of Hegel’s own understanding of mysticism as a philosophical approach. The three sections of this book present: the historical background of Hegel’s encounter with Böhme’s writings; the development of two different conceptions of mysticism in Hegel’s work; and finally Hegel’s approach to Böhme’s philosophy, discussing in detail the references to Böhme both in (...) published writings and manuscripts. According to Hegel, Böhme is “the first German philosopher”. The reason for placing Böhme at the very beginning of German philosophy is that Hegel considers him to be a profound thinker, despite his rudimentary education. Hegel’s fascination with Böhme mainly concerns the mystic’s understanding of the symbiotic relation between God and his opposite, the Devil: he considers this to be the true speculative core of Böhme’s thought. By interpreting Böhme, Hegel intends to free the speculative content of his thought from the limitations of the inadequate, barbarous form in which the mystic expressed it, and also to liberate Böhme from the prejudices surrounding his writings, placing him firmly in the territory of philosophy and detaching him from the obscurity of esotericism. Combining historical reconstructions and philosophical argumentation, this book guides the reader through an important phase in German philosophy, and ultimately into an inquiry about the relationship between mysticism and philosophy itself. (shrink)

This book investigates Hegel’s interpretation of the mystical philosophy of Jakob Böhme (1575-1624), considered in the context of the reception of Böhme in the 18th and 19th centuries, and of Hegel’s own understanding of mysticism as a philosophical approach. The three sections of this book present: the historical background of Hegel’s encounter with Böhme’s writings; the development of two different conceptions of mysticism in Hegel’s work; and finally Hegel’s approach to Böhme’s philosophy, discussing in detail the references to Böhme both (...) in published writings and manuscripts. According to Hegel, Böhme is “the first German philosopher”. The reason for placing Böhme at the very beginning of German philosophy is that Hegel considers him to be a profound thinker, despite his rudimentary education. Hegel’s fascination with Böhme mainly concerns the mystic’s understanding of the symbiotic relation between God and his opposite, the Devil: he considers this to be the true speculative core of Böhme’s thought. By interpreting Böhme, Hegel intends to free the speculative content of his thought from the limitations of the inadequate, barbarous form in which the mystic expressed it, and also to liberate Böhme from the prejudices surrounding his writings, placing him firmly in the territory of philosophy and detaching him from the obscurity of esotericism. Combining historical reconstructions and philosophical argumentation, this book guides the reader through an important phase in German philosophy, and ultimately into an inquiry about the relationship between mysticism and philosophy itself. (shrink)

The philosopher Jacob Böhme was known among his contemporaries for his creative use of the German language that led to inventing new words, or to attributing new meanings to existing ones. Böhme claimed that, properly speaking, his mother-tongue was not German but the ‘language of nature’, the language spoken by Adam before the Fall, and in which essences and words were still in perfect correspondence. This essay investigates how early English readers of Böhme assessed the transposition of Böhme’s works from (...) German into English: what interpretative challenges were entailed in translating Böhme’s language, and in interpreting Böhme through translations, rather than the originals? The essay is divided into three sections. First, I examine the role of Abraham von Franckenberg’s famous biography of Böhme, and consider how its English translation acted as a filter for approaching Böhme in England. Second, I discuss the strategies of readers and translators of Böhme active in seventeenth-century Cambridge. Third, I compare the approaches of two main readers, Henry More and Charles Hotham, demonstrating that they were aware of the gap that had opened between the ‘German Böhme’, and the new, successful creation of seventeenth-century England: the English ‘Jacob Behmen’. (shrink)

This article presents a detailed analysis of how the Cambridge Platonist Henry More (1614–1687) adapted the philosophy of the German mystic Jacob Böhme (1575–1624). For More, Böhme’s errors can be amended only by intervening radically in his philosophical system, discussing not what Böhme said, but what he should have said. In particular, the essay studies how and why More, in Censura, altered a scheme used by Böhme in his Clavis to explain visually the core of his philosophical insight. It claims (...) that this intervention, which consists mainly in moving the position of the Sun in the scheme, turns Böhme’s circular metaphysical system, in which the Sun, or fire, was the fulcrum of a perpetual movement, into a Neoplatonic system of emanation. In so doing, More fashions himself as a “Böhme redivivus”, showing to his readers that the only way of making sense of Böhme is to read him in Neoplatonic terms. The removal of the Sun from its original place in the scheme thus exemplifies More’s unease with Böhme’s conception of the Sun as fully embedded in the dynamic interplay of light and darkness, and shows that More’s interpretation of Böhme involves a full operation of rewriting. (shrink)

This article analyses the role that animals play in Della Porta’s method of physiognomics. It claims that Della Porta created his own, original, method by appropriating, and yet selectively adapting Aristotelian and pseudo-Aristotelian sources. This has not been adequately reconstructed before in previous studies on Della Porta. I trace, in two steps, the conceptual trajectory of Della Porta’s physiognomics, from human psychology to animal psychology, and ultimately from psychology to ethics. In the first step, I show how Della Porta substantially (...) adapts the physiognomic principle of the body-soul relationship as found in the pseudo-Aristotelian Physiognomonica. In the second, I demonstrate that the real aim of Della Porta’s physiognomics is a practical one, namely understanding how to live a good life, and I explain why he refers to Aristotle in order to ground this conception. (shrink)

Animals – both tame and wild, as metaphors and as real presences – populate many of More’s works. In this essay, I show that, from the early Psychodia Platonica to the Divine Dialogues, animals are at the core of key metaphysical issues that reverberate on the levels of psychology and ethics. In particular I discuss three main aspects: the role of animals in More’s critique of atheism, both as safeguard for the body–soul interaction and as proofs of divine providence in (...) nature; the problem of evil in the universe, and how to justify the existence of ‘evil’ animals in particular; the differentiation between animals and humans, especially on the basis of their respective possibility of attaining happiness. In all three cases, I argue that More attempts to ‘tame’ the nature of animals, and yet that he is aware that ‘animality’ remains partly untamed. (shrink)

When does Renaissance philosophy end, and Early Modern philosophy begin? Do Renaissance philosophers have something in common, which distinguishes them from Early Modern philosophers? And ultimately, what defines the modernity of the Early Modern period, and what role did the Renaissance play in shaping it? The answers to these questions are not just chronological. This book challenges traditional constructions of these periods, which partly reflect the prejudice that the Renaissance was a literary and artistic phenomenon, rather than a philosophical phase. (...) The essays in this book investigate how the legacy of Renaissance philosophers persisted in the following centuries through the direct encounters of subsequent generations with Renaissance philosophical texts. This volume treats Early Modern philosophers as joining their predecessors as ‘conversation partners’: the ‘conversations’ in this book feature, among others, Girolamo Cardano and Henry More, Thomas Hobbes and Lorenzo Valla, Bernardino Telesio and Francis Bacon, René Descartes and Tommaso Campanella, Giulio Cesare Vanini and the anonymous Theophrastus redivivus. (shrink)

Difficulties with periodization are often symptoms of internal diseases affecting the history of philosophy. Renaissance scholars and historians of early modern philosophy represent two scholarly communities that do not communicate with each other, as if an abrupt change of scenery had taken place from the sixteenth to the seventeenth century, from the age of Campanella to the age of Descartes. The assumption of an arbitrary division between these two periods continues to have unfortunate effects on the study of the history (...) of philosophy. This chapter provides a diagnosis of this problem by looking at the way in which periodization crystallized in the history of philosophy. It then lays a foundation for attempting a new approach to this issue, which consists in mapping direct connections and conceptual links of seventeenth-century philosophers with the philosophies of the Renaissance. We intend to shift the weight from the problem of assessing the ‘modernity’ of Renaissance philosophers to the creation of a space of interaction between Renaissance and early modern thinkers in the spirit of ‘conversation’, with special attention to tracing sources, direct allusions, confutations and continuities. (shrink)

Jacob Böhme (1575-1624) is one of the most important German thinkers. His writings have influenced literature, philosophy, religion and art beyond national borders from his time up to the present. One hundred years after the beginning of the Protestant Reformation - on the eve of the Thirty Years' War - Böhme wanted to give voice to the need for a deep spiritual and philosophical renewal. In a series of exhibitions - in Dresden, Coventry, Amsterdam, and Wrocław - the Dresden State (...) Art Collections recall this unconventional thinker, whose ideas about the relationship between science and belief, humanity and nature, woman and man are today more current than ever. Exhibition: Coventry Cathedral, UK (30.04. - 05.07.2019)"-- Back cover. (shrink)

Jacob Böhme (1575–1624) has been recognized as one of the internationally most influential German authors of the Early Modern period. Even today, his writings continue to impact fields as diverse as literature, philosophy, religion and art. Yet Böhme and his reception remain understudied. As a lay author, his works were often suppressed and circulated underground. Borrowing Böhme’s idea of “three worlds” or planes of existence, this volume traces the transmission of his thought through three stations: from his first underground readers (...) in Central and Eastern Europe, to the Netherlands, where most of his writings were first published, to Britain, where early translations made him a popular author for generations to come. Drawing on the work of both established and younger researchers from around the world, this volume charts new territory. It fills many lacunae and reveals a number of exciting discoveries, especially regarding the production and diffusion of manuscripts and previously overlooked sites of engagement. This book will be of interest to a wide range of scholars interested in the development of philosophical, religious, literary and artistic thought from the 17th century to the present day. (shrink)